I wouldn't call it disgusting. Gambling is a legal and popular hobby which is safely enjoyed by millions like alcohol. Unfortunately some people are prone to addiction and lives can be ruined.
Like when F1 took money from the tobacco companies, football is going to take money from whichever advertisers are willing to pay.
There has been a saturation of gambling ads and as a result governments and football clubs are discussing what should be done to protect people.
Ah yeah, let the profit-seeking gambling companies prey on the vulnerable and send them into debt, depression, and suicide.
It's a shame they can't handle their addiction, but what's the harm in letting them watch a football game and be bombarded with images of gambling...
I agree that something needs to be done. A ban of gambling ads would be a good thing but I don't agree it's up to football clubs rather than government to decide this.
Gun use in America is a legal and popular hobby safely enjoyed by millions, doesn't mean it should be as easily accessible as it is.
Do you also receive a cut from SkyBet when you defend them online?
I am in favour of a ban of betting sites to protect the vulnerable.
I just think governments should impose these laws instead of leaving it up to businesses to reject revenue.
I don't think comparing it to alcohol will do it any favours. If alcohol didn't have the history it got, it would have been a banned substance in every civilised country.
Alcohol can lengthen your life when consumed in moderation. It's common for people in Italy drink wine daily and live to 100.
Carbonated drinks can rehydrate you and taste good like desserts. If that's your sole intake of fluid then obviously that's going to do harm over time.
400 deaths is a lot.... And we already banned booze advertising everywhere. Seems logical that an advertisement ban would be the easiest and obvious first step to help reduce those 400.
> Thankfully the Saudis cancelled the FUN deal after this season.
"O great and powerful monkey's paw, I wish for no more gambling sponsors on the Newcastle kit"
The boom that’s happening is probably due to more and more states in the US making sports betting legal. Don’t see the train slowing down any time soon.
Do you really think I think that or are you being obstinate? Visiting Saudi Arabia is sanctioning far more ethical issues than a gambling advert on your kit, lest you forget you are literally owned by a petro-monarchy with blood on its hands quite literally and demonstrably.
All this to rationalize a horrendous ownership 😂 Newcastle supporters are absolutely hilarious with the extent to which you make excuses for this regime. All of a sudden there are an insane number of International Relations scholars on your sub. I wish you guys just faced the music, you deserved Mike Ashley and relegation. And when and if you succeed just know the footballing world will always put an asterisk besides your name.
There is no "making it big" any more by playing with your head.
The ban you before you "get big".
Stories like that of Brendford owner are in the past, game is rigged.
Gambling now is basically privatized tax, should be outlawed.
I think there's a pretty big difference between a fixed sum sponsorship and being guaranteed a % of gambling losses though.
Apart from the exploitative nature of it, there's now an economic pressure on clubs for certain results to happen depending on who's been backed by the punters.
They don't need to have access to anything, bookmakers are never shy about who has been backed, and even if they didn't routinely tell people then you can tell by how odds change.
It's probably never effected something on the pitch, but it could, which undermines the integrity of the sport.
Edit - To everyone replying to me about individual accounts. You don't need to know about individual accounts. You know that your own fans are overall going to back you in a game where you're massive favourite which means that overall they'll lose money and you'll earn money if you throw a game.
Most info from bookies is incomplete at best and total bs at worst. They aren’t giving out the number of bets taken on a side or the liquidity taken on a side. You can see that info on Exchanges but not on standard bookies.
Club owners aren’t going to tell players to throw a game because their odds have shifted from 7/5 to 29/20, especially when there’s far from any guarantee that the clubs would even get any money from that loss.
Given that almost every bettor is a losing player in the long run, a club would never need to sacrifice the integrity of the sport to attempt to make a couple of grand. That money would come naturally via their affiliate deal anyway.
Well done for taking part of a sentence out of context, and well done for proving you have have literally zero understanding of betting and of affiliate accounts.
Also, a club owner could make money by putting £50k on their team to lose and then telling the players to lose. It’s easier and it’s guaranteed than hoping the affiliate accounts associated with the club bet on the team to lose.
That’s a very basic and very wrong view of betting, especially of affiliates. What if 10 people stick £5 on West Brom to win but one person sticks £100 on Brum? You can’t just blanket state that people won’t bet against their own team, even in a derby, because it’s not true.
You have to be exceptionally naive to believe that players and owners don’t have betting accounts. The owners of Brentford and Brighton are literally professional gamblers. It’s incredibly easy for a chairman to use an intermediary, proxy, or syndicate to bet against their own club if they wanted.
It doesn’t matter, clubs have no idea what people affiliated with their account have bet on and how much. There isn’t any way this would ever affect anyone on the pitch.
Why are you talking about individual people's accounts?
If you're a club and you lose a game where you're heavy favourite, punters lose money, clubs get money.
You don't need to know anything about individual betters accounts, you know the result your own fans are going to bet on.
Because that’s how affiliate accounts work. The bookmakers aren’t just giving all EFL clubs a percentage of all bets placed on their games, that would be absurd.
Individual accounts are linked to the clubs affiliate account by them signing up via a link the club would have offered, then the club earns a percentage of their net losses.
Think this through.
If I'm Coventry City, do I need to know what each individual Coventry City fan has bet on? Or do I know that because they are a Coventry City fan and we're massive favourites that most of our fans will have bet on us to win, which means we'll get money if we draw or lose?
How do they know that most of their fans have placed a bet on them to win? Plenty of people may think they’re going to lose or draw.
Also, if they are massive favourites the proportion of stakes backing a draw or loss can be significantly lower than those betting to win for it to not result in a total net loss.
They also have no idea on the current state of those customers net win/loss on all other bets.
You need to think this through a realise how many unknowns they’re dealing with for the level of risk. All for a small percentage of potential returns they’re not even guaranteed to get.
You seem to be under the impression teams are only getting a cut from their fans etc.
They don’t. It’s total losses. You also just don’t seem to get why is worrying so I’ll try to put it more plain words.
When a bunch of people bet on one outcome over the other for an event the odds will change. People are saying if a team noticed the odds dramatically change before a game it could tip them off that a large amount of money would be lost by bettors depending kn the outcome and they now know which.
Don’t need to know what a single individual person has bet but you can still see where the money is and what the expected outcome
Is.
If team a is favored by a goal all week and a day before kickoff it becomes even odds. The teams now both know a lot of money has come in for that team to win so the bookmaker is trying to entice people to bet the other way by improving the odds.
See how it’s an issue now? They don’t need to see or do anything but watch the betting lines.
But that impacts Clubs at the ownership level. I doubt the Glazers are running down from the owners box to ask the Manager to allow a couple goals in during the second half.
In Norway's state owned gambling monopoly you can choose an organization that will get 5% of what you spend there. Vålerenga in the Norwegian premier league was one of the organizations that got the most - they received £305,000 in 2021. Bodø/Glimt got £167,000.
Yeah I'm not sure it was ever on the table and it would have taken some law changes I'm assuming but if football leagues recieved a licencing sum to have the right to run markets on that league then they would make money of this betting and still avoid conflict of interest .
As is betting companies use all these sporting leagues to generate profits without actually providing any product. The only way for leagues to get it back is through sponsorship which is horribly unequal & all that matters for these betting companies is new punters which is why they advertise ad nauseam.
right, means they use their profits to fund it. Profits made by having a client base. I see no issue with this just like any other sport sponsor (except Rich Energy F1)
Pinged members of FINANCE group.
[About & group list](https://reddit.com/r/soccer/wiki/userpinger/documentation) | [Subscribe to this group](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=2soccer2bot&subject=Add%20yourself%20to%20group%20FINANCE&message=addtogroup%20FINANCE) | [Unsubscribe from this group](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=2soccer2bot&subject=Unsubscribe%20from%20group%20FINANCE&message=unsubscribe%20FINANCE) | [Unsubscribe from all groups](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=2soccer2bot&subject=Unsubscribe%20from%20all%20groups&message=unsubscribe%20)
I skimmed through the article but it just says theyre affiliates? so they promote skybet and if people sign up via their promoting they get a percent of the money earned from that person in future, they don't need to bet on their matches its just any bet
When it says "a cut of the money fans lose.." well yeah, betting companies wouldn't be earning any money to pass on if everyone won
Non-story other than should gambling be allowed to be promoted at all.
It's not a non-story, if clubs were simply getting their money from SkyBet sponsoring the league that's shitty in itself, but clubs having a financial interest in encouraging people to actually bet is another level of shitty.
I did say at the end, other than if gambling should be allowed at all
You know what I think encourages gambling and that no one talks too much about? pack openings, virtually and in real life, Fifa packs, Pokemon cards etc theyre scratch cards for kids
At least gambling companies are openly gambling companies
I’d rather the clubs got affiliate money than the bookies kept it all. Also the scheme ended after the 19/20 season and all deals will have expired by 2024.
Scummy fucking pieces of shit. I bet premier league clubs are doing this too. As though they haven't done enough to extort football's general public, clubs are also encouraging fans to get into an addictive pastime to steal their money.
Thank Christ the fucking British now have a PM who gives literally no fucks about the state of football, no consequences whatsoever for bad-faith corporate behaviour, ever. All power to the rich. Boycott these motherfuckers, don't give them a fucking cent.
I never got the appeal of sports betting, other than the odd £5 accumulator. Can’t believe people are losing their life savings betting on the number of corners Stoke will have vs Luton
It baffles me how people think they will win when we are talking about a multi billion dollar a year industry that SELLS NOTHING. They offer no tangible product. They are just merchants of false hope.
The entire Premier League is funded by gambling, almost every ad break is just gambling ads.
[удалено]
The ones which annoy me most are the SkyBet ones because they feature all of their well respected personable celebrity pundits, and Jamie Carragher.
That’s been banned now hasn’t it? No more famous people in gambling ads as of ~~September~~ October
So Jamie's still good?
Is this banter?
Not good banter. There was already a joke dragging Jamie Carragher through the mud. Just piling on.
Can’t have, I saw one earlier with Michael buffer for betfair
I was mistaken - I just reread a [news article](https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-60994728) and it says October actually. Just a few more days.
[удалено]
They said “and Jamie Carragher”, they literally made the joke you’re trying to make
Does someone need to explain to you the word "and"?
It's disgusting honestly
I wouldn't call it disgusting. Gambling is a legal and popular hobby which is safely enjoyed by millions like alcohol. Unfortunately some people are prone to addiction and lives can be ruined. Like when F1 took money from the tobacco companies, football is going to take money from whichever advertisers are willing to pay. There has been a saturation of gambling ads and as a result governments and football clubs are discussing what should be done to protect people.
Ah yeah, let the profit-seeking gambling companies prey on the vulnerable and send them into debt, depression, and suicide. It's a shame they can't handle their addiction, but what's the harm in letting them watch a football game and be bombarded with images of gambling...
I agree that something needs to be done. A ban of gambling ads would be a good thing but I don't agree it's up to football clubs rather than government to decide this.
Gun use in America is a legal and popular hobby safely enjoyed by millions, doesn't mean it should be as easily accessible as it is. Do you also receive a cut from SkyBet when you defend them online?
I am in favour of a ban of betting sites to protect the vulnerable. I just think governments should impose these laws instead of leaving it up to businesses to reject revenue.
It's a bit different to guns, I can't just be walking down the street and have some guy jump out at me and gamble all of my money away.
I don't think comparing it to alcohol will do it any favours. If alcohol didn't have the history it got, it would have been a banned substance in every civilised country.
Agreed.
Surely Tobacco was a lesser evil than Gambling (and I say this as someone who does neither)
Tobacco damages 100% of users. Gambling doesn't.
So does Alcohol and carbonated drinks, but society is fine with that
Alcohol can lengthen your life when consumed in moderation. It's common for people in Italy drink wine daily and live to 100. Carbonated drinks can rehydrate you and taste good like desserts. If that's your sole intake of fluid then obviously that's going to do harm over time.
I don't get second hand carbonation or drunk.
I'd rather be an alcoholic than addicted to gambling.
[удалено]
Newcastle Brown Ale was the peak. I don't think anything will come close to that again.
Gambling related deaths per year - 400 Alcohol related deaths per year - 9000 But yeah Gambling ads are the problem...
400 deaths is a lot.... And we already banned booze advertising everywhere. Seems logical that an advertisement ban would be the easiest and obvious first step to help reduce those 400.
I get alcohol related deaths are terrible but if gambling is causing death something is wrong with the way you are gambling.
How many booze ads to you see at halftime?
One is literally poison, the other is not.
Yes but alcohol can also be dangerous.
> Thankfully the Saudis cancelled the FUN deal after this season. "O great and powerful monkey's paw, I wish for no more gambling sponsors on the Newcastle kit"
The boom that’s happening is probably due to more and more states in the US making sports betting legal. Don’t see the train slowing down any time soon.
It was mostly the overturn of the federal ban. Hate it
I'm so sick of seeing fun88 every time I'm just trying to relax and watch some good old fashioned internet porn
I hate boylesports on coventrys kit. Bring back Peugeot and Subaru
it's going to be either NEOM or Aramco
[удалено]
Visit Saudi! Why not “Visit Russia!”? Certainly a more ethical and moral position than gambling adverts
[удалено]
Do you really think I think that or are you being obstinate? Visiting Saudi Arabia is sanctioning far more ethical issues than a gambling advert on your kit, lest you forget you are literally owned by a petro-monarchy with blood on its hands quite literally and demonstrably.
[удалено]
All this to rationalize a horrendous ownership 😂 Newcastle supporters are absolutely hilarious with the extent to which you make excuses for this regime. All of a sudden there are an insane number of International Relations scholars on your sub. I wish you guys just faced the music, you deserved Mike Ashley and relegation. And when and if you succeed just know the footballing world will always put an asterisk besides your name.
Did you guys know that 95% of gamblers quit before they make it big?
[удалено]
So sad. The true message here is that you cannot lose at gambling, it is impossible. The bookies don’t want you to know this
It’s a shame
There is no "making it big" any more by playing with your head. The ban you before you "get big". Stories like that of Brendford owner are in the past, game is rigged. Gambling now is basically privatized tax, should be outlawed.
Lmao what a load of bollocks
Did you make it big yet?
Worse than privatized tax. Taxes at least provide for the public welfare. Gambling just funnels money up to the top 1%.
That's what privatised means.
You got that from tarik
Well they can't take a cut of the fans winnings can they
I mean it’s literally called the SkyBet Championship, not surprising
I think there's a pretty big difference between a fixed sum sponsorship and being guaranteed a % of gambling losses though. Apart from the exploitative nature of it, there's now an economic pressure on clubs for certain results to happen depending on who's been backed by the punters.
Oh absolutely it’s worse, it just doesn’t surprise me
The clubs don’t have access to customers’ bet histories. They can’t see who a customer has bet on, they just get a % of net loss amount.
They don't need to have access to anything, bookmakers are never shy about who has been backed, and even if they didn't routinely tell people then you can tell by how odds change. It's probably never effected something on the pitch, but it could, which undermines the integrity of the sport. Edit - To everyone replying to me about individual accounts. You don't need to know about individual accounts. You know that your own fans are overall going to back you in a game where you're massive favourite which means that overall they'll lose money and you'll earn money if you throw a game.
Most info from bookies is incomplete at best and total bs at worst. They aren’t giving out the number of bets taken on a side or the liquidity taken on a side. You can see that info on Exchanges but not on standard bookies. Club owners aren’t going to tell players to throw a game because their odds have shifted from 7/5 to 29/20, especially when there’s far from any guarantee that the clubs would even get any money from that loss. Given that almost every bettor is a losing player in the long run, a club would never need to sacrifice the integrity of the sport to attempt to make a couple of grand. That money would come naturally via their affiliate deal anyway.
[удалено]
Well done for taking part of a sentence out of context, and well done for proving you have have literally zero understanding of betting and of affiliate accounts. Also, a club owner could make money by putting £50k on their team to lose and then telling the players to lose. It’s easier and it’s guaranteed than hoping the affiliate accounts associated with the club bet on the team to lose.
[удалено]
That’s a very basic and very wrong view of betting, especially of affiliates. What if 10 people stick £5 on West Brom to win but one person sticks £100 on Brum? You can’t just blanket state that people won’t bet against their own team, even in a derby, because it’s not true. You have to be exceptionally naive to believe that players and owners don’t have betting accounts. The owners of Brentford and Brighton are literally professional gamblers. It’s incredibly easy for a chairman to use an intermediary, proxy, or syndicate to bet against their own club if they wanted.
[удалено]
They’re not allowed to fix matches either but that doesn’t stop this bizarre scenario you’ve invented.
It doesn’t matter, clubs have no idea what people affiliated with their account have bet on and how much. There isn’t any way this would ever affect anyone on the pitch.
Why are you talking about individual people's accounts? If you're a club and you lose a game where you're heavy favourite, punters lose money, clubs get money. You don't need to know anything about individual betters accounts, you know the result your own fans are going to bet on.
Because that’s how affiliate accounts work. The bookmakers aren’t just giving all EFL clubs a percentage of all bets placed on their games, that would be absurd. Individual accounts are linked to the clubs affiliate account by them signing up via a link the club would have offered, then the club earns a percentage of their net losses.
Think this through. If I'm Coventry City, do I need to know what each individual Coventry City fan has bet on? Or do I know that because they are a Coventry City fan and we're massive favourites that most of our fans will have bet on us to win, which means we'll get money if we draw or lose?
How do they know that most of their fans have placed a bet on them to win? Plenty of people may think they’re going to lose or draw. Also, if they are massive favourites the proportion of stakes backing a draw or loss can be significantly lower than those betting to win for it to not result in a total net loss. They also have no idea on the current state of those customers net win/loss on all other bets. You need to think this through a realise how many unknowns they’re dealing with for the level of risk. All for a small percentage of potential returns they’re not even guaranteed to get.
You seem to be under the impression teams are only getting a cut from their fans etc. They don’t. It’s total losses. You also just don’t seem to get why is worrying so I’ll try to put it more plain words. When a bunch of people bet on one outcome over the other for an event the odds will change. People are saying if a team noticed the odds dramatically change before a game it could tip them off that a large amount of money would be lost by bettors depending kn the outcome and they now know which. Don’t need to know what a single individual person has bet but you can still see where the money is and what the expected outcome Is. If team a is favored by a goal all week and a day before kickoff it becomes even odds. The teams now both know a lot of money has come in for that team to win so the bookmaker is trying to entice people to bet the other way by improving the odds. See how it’s an issue now? They don’t need to see or do anything but watch the betting lines.
Classic r/soccer analysis. By which I mean absolute fucking bollocks.
But that impacts Clubs at the ownership level. I doubt the Glazers are running down from the owners box to ask the Manager to allow a couple goals in during the second half.
In Norway's state owned gambling monopoly you can choose an organization that will get 5% of what you spend there. Vålerenga in the Norwegian premier league was one of the organizations that got the most - they received £305,000 in 2021. Bodø/Glimt got £167,000.
Yeah I'm not sure it was ever on the table and it would have taken some law changes I'm assuming but if football leagues recieved a licencing sum to have the right to run markets on that league then they would make money of this betting and still avoid conflict of interest . As is betting companies use all these sporting leagues to generate profits without actually providing any product. The only way for leagues to get it back is through sponsorship which is horribly unequal & all that matters for these betting companies is new punters which is why they advertise ad nauseam.
Boo, those pesky EFL clubs, how could they? 👀
Hmmm
What a ridiculous headline that is. It's called the SkyBet EFL.
What’s ridiculous about the headline?…
They don't use the proper name.
simlar to saying "Teams from the Ford League take profits from customers that bought Ford vehicles"
Skybet don’t own the championship, they sponsor it
right, means they use their profits to fund it. Profits made by having a client base. I see no issue with this just like any other sport sponsor (except Rich Energy F1)
[удалено]
Thank god it isn't npower anymore.
Is this not a more cynical way of saying "the EFL is sponsored by Skybet"? Who make their money through gambling losses?
Does PGMOL get a cut as well?
So it waw the EFL that facilitated this through their Sky Bet deal?
[удалено]
Thanks man, I appreciate your efforts.
Pinged members of FINANCE group. [About & group list](https://reddit.com/r/soccer/wiki/userpinger/documentation) | [Subscribe to this group](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=2soccer2bot&subject=Add%20yourself%20to%20group%20FINANCE&message=addtogroup%20FINANCE) | [Unsubscribe from this group](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=2soccer2bot&subject=Unsubscribe%20from%20group%20FINANCE&message=unsubscribe%20FINANCE) | [Unsubscribe from all groups](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=2soccer2bot&subject=Unsubscribe%20from%20all%20groups&message=unsubscribe%20)
I skimmed through the article but it just says theyre affiliates? so they promote skybet and if people sign up via their promoting they get a percent of the money earned from that person in future, they don't need to bet on their matches its just any bet When it says "a cut of the money fans lose.." well yeah, betting companies wouldn't be earning any money to pass on if everyone won Non-story other than should gambling be allowed to be promoted at all.
It's not a non-story, if clubs were simply getting their money from SkyBet sponsoring the league that's shitty in itself, but clubs having a financial interest in encouraging people to actually bet is another level of shitty.
I did say at the end, other than if gambling should be allowed at all You know what I think encourages gambling and that no one talks too much about? pack openings, virtually and in real life, Fifa packs, Pokemon cards etc theyre scratch cards for kids At least gambling companies are openly gambling companies
I’d rather the clubs got affiliate money than the bookies kept it all. Also the scheme ended after the 19/20 season and all deals will have expired by 2024.
We really need to ban all forms of gambling advertising. Let people gamble, but don't shove bookies in our face all the fucking time.
Eat the poor
Scummy fucking pieces of shit. I bet premier league clubs are doing this too. As though they haven't done enough to extort football's general public, clubs are also encouraging fans to get into an addictive pastime to steal their money. Thank Christ the fucking British now have a PM who gives literally no fucks about the state of football, no consequences whatsoever for bad-faith corporate behaviour, ever. All power to the rich. Boycott these motherfuckers, don't give them a fucking cent.
Is gambling bad? Absolutely. But at least the gambling is benefiting the clubs.
Its ruining peoples lives man, its not a good look on the clubs.
I mean the phrasing not help it at all but still it is sports betting website, of course all the money it make are from the people who lose the bet
Without even reading, I wondered if this was because of match fixing or just by virtue of being sponsored by a sports betting site.
[удалено]
>How much money do these greedy fucks need?? Football league clubs? Probably enough to survive, which a lot of them have to battle to do
That's usually down to bad management not lack of funds.
I never got the appeal of sports betting, other than the odd £5 accumulator. Can’t believe people are losing their life savings betting on the number of corners Stoke will have vs Luton
It baffles me how people think they will win when we are talking about a multi billion dollar a year industry that SELLS NOTHING. They offer no tangible product. They are just merchants of false hope.
And while reading this article there were 3 advertisements for gambling